(1)   Has he read an article titled “Hicks will get a fair trial: PM” published in The Australian on 23 February 2007; if not why not.

(2)   Is he aware of the Prime Minister’s comments that the “accused must be presumed to be innocent until his guilt is established by legal and competent evidence beyond reasonable doubt”; if not, why not.

(3)   Is the use of hearsay evidence “competent” if the conditions and/or methods that are used to obtain that evidence are not disclosed or are unable to be ascertained by a defendant or a defence lawyer; if so, how; if not, why not.

(1)   Yes.

(2)   Yes.

(3)   The Manual for Military Commissions requires trial counsel to provide to the defence a range of information, including any statements or documents that trial counsel intends to use as evidence in the prosecution case-in-chief or that are material to the preparation of the defence. Only where the sources, methods or activities by which evidence has been acquired are classified for reasons of national security and where the evidence is considered reliable by the military commission judge may these matters be protected from disclosure. In these circumstances, the trial judge may order an unclassified summary of the sources, methods, or activities by which the United States acquired the evidence to be provided to the commission and the defence. Such evidence would also be subject to the overriding discretion of the military commission judge to exclude any evidence when its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.